597 resultados para Teacher Training Programs Literacy, Teaching and Learning, Literacy, Constructivism


Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Includes bibliographies.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Bibliography: p. 22-23.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Bibliography: p. 24-25.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Includes bibliographical references.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Includes bibliographical references (p. [8]).

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Title on inside leaf: Technical assistance guide for offender programs.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Background and Objectives: This paper reports on historical changes in assessment culminating in the experience of one discipline with negotiated student feedback that has helped design and modify assessment to cater for the requirements of both students and teachers. The standard of assessment required to pass Obstetrics and Gynaecology in the four year graduate entry program in the School of Medicine at The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia has become less formalised and more collaborative. Changes in assessment in this discipline over the last 20 years reflect the development of an understanding of the educational principles associated with adult teaching and learning. Assessment has evolved from being teacher focussed, with questionable reliability, validity, and emphasis on outcomes, to being focussed on learning and the student. Multiplechoice examinations, combined with a collaborative approach to the reliability and validity of questions and answers and a debrief or feedback session have been found to provide an assessment format that is art acceptable measure oflearning for both teachers and students. Changes in assessment reflect a collaborative process between teachers and students based on principles of adult learning and involving negotiated student feedback. Our experience with this form of negotiated outcome for assessment is presented together with suggestions for improvement and is contrasted with assessment methods used in this department over the last 20 years. Change and refinement will continue as medical programs strive to meet the learning needs of students and assessment outcomes that are acceptable to its teachers.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Reports on the efficacy of physical activity intervention trials usually only include discussion of the primary outcomes. However, assessing factors such as participant retention, adherence and compliance can assist in the accurate interpretation of the overall impact of a program in terms of reach and appeal. A quasi-randomised trial was carried out to assess and compare retention and adherence rates, and compliance with, a twice weekly resistance training program provided either individually at home or in a group format. Retirement villages (n=6) were assigned to either 'Have A Try' (HAT, home-based) or 'Come Have A Try' (CHAT, group-based); both programs included nine strength and two balance exercises. The program involved a 20-week Intervention Phase a 24-week Maintenance Phase and a 20-week On-going Maintenance Phase. One hundred and nineteen participants (mean age 80 +/- 6 years) were recruited (HAT = 38, CHAT = 81). There was no difference in retention rates at the end of the Intervention Phase, but significantly more HAT than CHAT participants had dropped out of the study (p < 0.01) after the Maintenance Phase and the On-going Maintenance Phase. During the Intervention Phase, over half the HAT and CHAT participants completed >= 75% of the prescribed activity sessions, but adherence was significantly greater in CHAT than HAT during the Maintenance Phase (p < 0.01). Participants in CHAT were significantly more compliant than HAT participants (p < 0.05). Both home- and group-based formats were successful over the short-term, but, in retirement villages, the group program had better adherence and compliance in the longer-term. (c) 2006 Sports Medicine Australia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.